Analysishttp://www.maclife.com/taxonomy/term/53/all
enIs Apple headed down another collaborative dead-end with CarPlay?http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/apple_headed_down_another_collaborative_deadend_carplay
<!--paging_filter--><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" />It's easy to overlook, but there's a very simple formula for Apple's success. It's the reason why you can take an iPhone or an iMac out of its box and it just works, and the reason why Samsung is secretly working on its own mobile OS.</p><p>Control. Steve Jobs summed it up perfectly during the 2007 Macworld keynote:</p><p>"Now, you know, one of the pioneers of our industry, Alan Kay, has had a lot of great quotes throughout the years. And I ran across one of them recently that explains how we look at this. Explains why we go about doing things the way we do, because we love software. And here’s the quote: 'People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware.'"</p><p>And then he demonstrated the iPhone and hammered the point home.</p><p>It's not the just the best way, it's the only way. There have been numerous times over the years when Apple has tried to make things for other companies, and it always ends badly.</p><p>Remember the iPod+HP partnership? A forgettable alliance to say the least, it had such promise when it launched in 2004, with Steve heaping effusive praise on Hewlett Packard in the announcement: “As the industry balkanizes by offering digital music wrapped in a multitude of incompatible proprietary technologies, consumers will be reassured in getting the same unparalleled digital music solutions from both HP and Apple, two leaders in the digital music era.”</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/ipodhp-box.jpeg" width="620" height="395" /></p><p>About a year later, the deal was dead, with Apple admitting that HP's iPod sales had accounted for "an average of 5 percent of all iPods sold since the deal was originally struck between the companies."</p><p>Then there was the Motorola ROKR E1. Adjectives like "pioneering," "world-class," and "unrivaled" were bandied about during its high-profile unveiling, and Steve went so far as to call it "the world’s best music experience on a mobile phone." (Although, at the time that might have been true.) As far as I can recall, there was no official end to the partnership, but people stopped caring long before the iPhone made its appearance sixteen months later.</p><p>Simply put, Apple doesn't do well making things for other people. (We won't even discuss Safari for Windows.) It needs to have control over every aspect of the process, from conception to design to development, and as soon as it loses part of it, it tends to lose its focus, too.</p><p>That's why I'm a bit concerned about the CarPlay project. When it was originally announced as iOS in the Car last year,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/ios_car_siricontrolled_screen_weve_been_waiting" target="_blank">I wrote a column praising its handsfree potential</a>, imagining an interface that seamlessly integrated with our iPhones and transformed our clunky navigation systems into simple, elegant works of art.&nbsp;</p><p>I was half-right. CarPlay is certainly as sophisticated as I thought it would be, with giant recognizable icons that almost make more sense than they do on our iOS devices. Everything works as you'd expect, and the Siri integration is predictably tight, requiring very little touching of the screen itself.&nbsp;</p><p>But the problem is, you have to get there. When Apple first began talking about its iOS in the Car initiative, I assumed (perhaps foolishly) it would be a pre-programmed dealer option, where Apple would take over the whole system, building the entertainment and navigation ends of things and providing an SDK for the more car-specific settings and options. What we got instead is a sort of sub-environment that runs relatively independent of the larger system.&nbsp;On the Ferrari model, for example, <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2014/03/04/apple-carplay-ferrari-ff-hands-on/" target="_blank">you need to physically press a dedicated button on the dashboard to enter the CarPlay realm</a>, and only then will your contacts, music, messages, and maps come to life on the display (assuming you own an iPhone 5, 5c, or 5s and you've plugged it in). Any buttons or dials you would normally use on the steering wheel or console now operate Apple's interface, as will the touchscreen.</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/ferrari_carplay.jpg" width="620" height="351" /></p><p>But CarPlay, which appears to have Apple's usual attention to detail on the surface, doesn't offer much that the stock system doesn't offer. It's designed to be a "smarter, safer way to use your iPhone in the car" and the Siri integration delivers on this promise, but there's nothing particularly innovative about any of it. Our cars already make calls, stream music, and give us directions; in my 2013 Hyundai Veloster, my iPhone already integrates well enough with the navigation system (without wires); it doesn't look nearly as good, but it does the job.</p><p>For most people, that's enough. Imagine for a moment if your iPhone automatically booted into Android and you needed to launch a dedicated app to get to iOS. How many users would bother to switch? Apple diehards like you or I would dutifully oblige, but most people would be content to stay in Android. (And believe me, if this ridiculous scenario was reversed, we'd see a lot of Galaxy S4s running iOS.)</p><p>And that's how it's going to be with CarPlay. Most people are going to keep their iPhones in their pockets and their navigation system tuned to whatever's on the screen when they start their engines. Maybe they'll try it once or twice, but the majority of them won't care enough to go through the launch process before each trip. Apple doesn't have the control it needs to truly deliver iOS in the Car, and until that happens, it's just not going to make much of an impact.</p><p>Which is a shame. Because CarPlay is a much cooler name.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/apple_headed_down_another_collaborative_deadend_carplay#commentsAnalysisApple DesignCarPlayColumnsDesigniOSiOS in the CarRounded RectanglesSiriFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodTue, 11 Mar 2014 18:37:45 +0000Michael Simon19529 at http://www.maclife.comIn the innovation race, Apple has always been the tortoisehttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/innovation_race_apple_has_always_been_tortoise
<!--paging_filter--><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/02/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" />On Steve Jobs' birthday last week, Tim Cook tweeted a remembrance of his friend and mentor that summed up Steve's genius in just a few words: "Details matter, it’s worth waiting to get it right."&nbsp;</p><p>Meanwhile, a few thousand miles away Samsung was getting ready to announce its newest "next big things," the Galaxy S5, along with a couple of Galaxy Gears, a fitness tracker and some refinements to its TouchWiz interface.</p><p>The overlapping dates were a happy coincidence. The choice of quote was not. Cook was sending a message to anyone criticizing Apple for bringing up the rear in the smartwatch race: Slow and steady is how we win.</p><p>It's been the formula since long before Apple was the most valuable company in the world, and it'll be the one Apple follows after Tim Cook has handed over the reins to the next CEO. Apple's revolutionary products have rarely been something entirely new. I may be missing something, but the last time I can remember Apple releasing a product the world had never seen was back in 1993 with the Newton digital assistant.&nbsp;</p><p>And we all know how that turned out.</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/screen_shot_2014-03-04_at_11.33.42_am.png" width="620" height="328" /></p><p>Apple is as much a refiner as it is an innovator. If I had to pick one quality that made Steve Jobs a true genius, it would have be his ability to see how to make a product better, not just by adding features or flair, but to truly strip it down to its essence. And I'm not talking about the near-finished prototypes Jony Ive brought him; Steve could look at the biggest piece of junk on the market and extract its value.</p><p>Take the iPod. Before the big unveiling, Steve talked about the state of digital music, drawing particular attention to the Rio 800 and Creative Nomad Jukebox, which looked downright ridiculous next to the iPod's sleek curves:</p><p>"So, let's look at the landscape. The first thing, if you want to listen to music portably, you go out and buy a CD player. That's one way to go — about 10-15 songs — or you could buy a flash player, you could buy an mp3 CD player. Or you could buy a hard disk-based jukebox player...and that's where we want to be. And we are introducing a product today that takes us exactly there. And that product is called iPod."</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/screen_shot_2014-03-04_at_11.28.18_am.png" width="620" height="317" /></p><p>And then there was the iPhone keynote, where he took the Moto Q, Blackberry, Palm Treo, and Nokia E62 to task:</p><p>"The most advanced phones are called smartphones, so they say, and they typically combine a phone with email capability, plus they say it's the Internet — but it's sort of the baby Internet — into one device, plus they have these plastic keyboards on them. The problem is they're not so smart and they're not so easy to use.... What we want to do is make a leapfrog product that's way smarter than any mobile device has ever been and [is] super easy to use. This is what iPhone is."</p><p>Or maybe you remember Macworld 2008, when he introduced the world to the MacBook Air:</p><p>"We went out and looked at all the thin notebooks out there.... We looked at all of them out there and tried to distill the best of the breed of all of them. They generally weight about three pounds; they're about 0.8 to 1.2 inches thin; they're wedge-shaped.... The thickest part of the MacBook Air is still thinner than the thinnest part of the Sony TZ series."</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/03/screen_shot_2014-03-04_at_11.36.17_am.png" width="620" height="296" /></p><p>Even when the iPod mini made its appearance, the preceding slide showed a picture of the high-end flash market leader at the time, the rather inelegant Rio Cali. Time after time, Steve took existing products that had generated a small amount of buzz and turned them into innovative wonders.&nbsp;</p><p>On that fateful day in January 2007, Steve said it himself: "Today, Apple is going to reinvent the phone." There was nothing necessarily new in the iPhone — an iPod, a mobile phone, and an Internet communicator — but Apple put them together in a revolutionary package.</p><p>It's not his ideas that made Steve so special; it's the execution. And no one knows that more than Tim Cook. When his picked that particular quote to sum up Steve's existence, he was reminding us all what it takes to be great: Patience. Perfection. Persistence.</p><p>The critics who are complaining about Apple's so-called lack of innovation just don't get it. The process hasn't changed. It's ingrained in its culture, and you can bet that Jony Ive and his team have studied every smartwatch and fitness band out there and learned what makes them tick. Apple isn't interested in getting there first; it only wants to carry the best product across the finish line. And if it never gets there, so be it.</p><p>It's the very opposite of what Samsung is doing. Sure, there may be a new generation of Galaxy Gears that look and act a little better than the one they replaced, but they're still no better than the Nomad Jukebox or Rio 800 were before the iPod. The only thing that's changed is that now everyone is trying to anticipate Apple's next move. Samsung, Google, Sony, and Qualcomm have all taken a crack at what they think is Apple's next idea, trying to beat Jony I've at his own game.</p><p>So far, nothing has come close. But something tells me a couple of them have already earned a spot in the iWatch keynote.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/innovation_race_apple_has_always_been_tortoise#commentsBlogsAnalysisApple DesignApple vs. SamsungColumnsDesignJony IveRounded RectanglessmartwatchSteve JobsTue, 04 Mar 2014 19:31:08 +0000Michael Simon19476 at http://www.maclife.comIn Defense of the Samsung Galaxy S5's Awful Designhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/defense_samsung_galaxy_s5s_awful_design
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u338318/2014/02/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>I could write a month's worth of columns on my distaste for Samsung. From its petty Apple-bashing ads to its shameless and slavish implementation of every good idea it sees, Samsung is unapologetically unoriginal, slapping its name on anything it thinks can make a buck. Many of its products have no discernible value, often created to fill a seemingly underserved niche and sold to unsuspecting consumers who think they're getting something better than they are: cheap, compromised smartphones with crippled processors, low-resolution screens, and tiny batteries that force consumers into decisions they regret for the majority of their 24-month contract.</p><p>But the Galaxy S is different. The clear flagship of Samsung's sizable lineup, the handset represents the pinnacle of the company's innovation and development, cramming the very best features into a portable, lightweight package. Year after year, each recurrent S phone has pushed the envelope of convention and expectation in its efforts to deliver a device that rivals Apple's lofty position at the top of the smartphone pyramid.</p><p>Which, of course, is to say nothing of its design. When the first Galaxy landed in June 2010, it looked suspiciously like a 2007 iPhone — so much so that Apple launched a lawsuit claiming rights to its "flat, clear, black-colored, rectangular front surface with four evenly rounded corners." But in reality, the similarities were even deeper than that: the shiny chrome bezel that peeked out from around the sides; the centered home button; the thin, curved backplate; even the elongated speaker centered above the screen was reminiscent of an iPhone. Argue all you want about Apple's sole right to make rounded rectangles, but it's hard to ignore that the Galaxy S was a complete rip-off of Apple's original design.</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/02/samsung-galaxy-s_620.jpg" width="620" height="600" /></p><p>But through five incarnations, the Galaxy S has become the cornerstone of the high-end Android market. While its giant display has gotten most of the attention — the 4-inch Galaxy S looks tiny now, but it launched the opening salvo in the Android screen wars — Samsung has carved out a very recognizable niche in the smartphone world. Some 200 million have been sold around the world and they're as easy to spot in someone's hand as the iPhone.</p><p>You see, most people don't buy smartphones based on specs. Sure, every new model has a feature or two that draws in buyers — touch ID, Smart Scroll, UltraPixels — but the majority of shoppers make their purchase based on what they've seen before. It's not so much of an Android vs. iOS battle; in fact, if Apple were to suddenly allow KitKat to be installed on the iPhone, I imagine market share numbers would stay largely unchanged. In a nutshell, the majority of high-end smartphone buyers are choosing their handset based on familiarity, not features.</p><p>This is why the iPhone 5c sales are lagging — it just doesn't look like an iPhone. It may be a fantastic handset with a great design, but people don't think of colored plastic when they go shopping for an iPhone. They want that unmistakable design that lets people know they're using one if the best handsets out there, something that doesn't &nbsp;even need a logo to be recognized; there have never been any discernible markings on the front of the iPhone (other than the home button), yet everyone instantly knows it's an Apple phone.</p><p>That's why <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/news/samsung_asks_olympic_athletes_cover_apple_logos_during_opening_ceremony" target="_blank">that whole Olympics kerfuffle</a> was so ridiculous. Even if officials had followed through on Samsung's apparent demand that athletes surreptitiously cover up the logo on the back of their iPhones, it wouldn't have mattered. Every one of the 30 million viewers would have known the moment an athlete snapped a pic with his or her 5s. It's the same with the MacBook Pro on Jimmy Fallon's Tonight Show desk — Apple products don't need a logo plastered all over them to be recognized.&nbsp;</p><p><img src="/files/u338318/2014/02/sm-g900f_copper_gold_01.jpg" width="620" height="620" /></p><p>Just take a look at the Mac Pro. The only logo you'll find is an assuming one around the back above the port bay, yet its design is already iconic. When it makes its way into its first summer blockbuster, no one will wonder who makes it.</p><p>And that's what Samsung wants to achieve, at any cost. Even when it was copying Apple, its motivations were clear: to build a phone that's just as instantly recognizable. These days, the Galaxy S looks nothing like the the iPhone (though the S5's reduced curvature is beginning to echo Apple's shape again), and if nothing else, the past few revisions have proven that Samsung has no desire to deviate too much from its signature look that it introduced with the S3: a large, somewhat symmetrical handset with a strong screen-to-body ratio, a slightly bulbous camera and a trio of physical buttons.</p><p>In fact, when those <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/news/photos_alleged_prototype_bigger_thinner_iphone_6_surface" target="_blank">fake Sonny Dickson images of the larger iPhone 6</a> made the rounds a couple of weeks back, more than a few people remarked that they looked a bit like the Galaxy S4. With its 5.1-inch screen and perforated back, <a href="http://www.samsung.com/global/microsite/galaxys5/index.html" target="_blank">the S5</a> may be over-the-top and garish — especially in that god-awful gold color — but it's unmistakably a Samsung Galaxy S phone. It's the most recognizable "phablet" around, and anyone who builds a large-screen phone these days, be it Apple, Motorola or LG, needs to step delicately around Samsung's design to distinguish itself.</p><p>And that's worth more than any attack ad.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/defense_samsung_galaxy_s5s_awful_design#commentsBlogsAnalysisandroidApple DesignApple vs. SamsungColumnsDesignGalaxy S5Rounded RectanglesSamsungTue, 25 Feb 2014 21:54:39 +0000Michael Simon19415 at http://www.maclife.comSteve Jobs' Eye for Design Isn't What Apple Misses Mosthttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/steve_jobs_eye_design_isnt_what_apple_misses_most
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>For years we've been trying to figure out what Steve Jobs meant when he dropped this juicy nugget to Walter Isaacson while being interviewed for his biography:</p><p>“I’d like to create an integrated television set that is completely easy to use. It would be seamlessly synced with all of your devices and with iCloud. It will have the simplest user interface you could imagine. I finally cracked it."</p><p>The sad part is, we may never truly know. It could have been a TV or a TiVo-like set-top box or a cloud service able to be beamed from our iOS devices to any screen we choose, but whatever he had dreamed up, there's one thing we can pretty much bank on: We would have seen it by now. Whatever negotiating needed to done would have been wrapped up and all the dotted lines would have signatures on them. But instead of gushing over the latest revolution in our living room, a report last week by the <a href="http://m.us.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304703804579379611592863936?mobile=y" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a> suggests that Apple is still struggling to come to terms with any of the major players in the cable TV game:</p><p>"Apple's latest approach is far less ambitious," the paper wrote. "Instead of asking for full current seasons of shows, it is asking programmers for just the most recent five episodes of current-season shows — the standard for video-on-demand services in the TV industry, a person familiar with the matter said. Apple is also proposing to disable fast-forwarding on shows for three days after they air, which would protect TV channels."</p><p>Now, none of these apparent compromises are deal-breakers from an innovation standpoint, but after negotiating for several years, it would seem that Apple is in no better position to call the shots than it was when we first started hearing about its fabled television device. And that's just not the way Steve operated.</p><p>This was the man who convinced an industry of skittish music executives that Napster could be monetized. During a time when record labels were turning the screws on digital music to protect their content, Jobs convinced them to take the biggest gamble of all: breaking up albums and selling songs a la cart for a less than a buck apiece. No matter the artist, no matter the track, they would all be one price: "Stairway to Heaven" would cost the same as "Ice Ice Baby" or "Macarena."</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/02/steve_jobs_original_ipod_620px.jpg" width="620" height="300" /></p><p>It still sounds crazy, but the iTunes model transformed the industry, singlehandedly reversing its steady decline and changing the way albums are released and artists are marketed. Today, the iTunes Store is a legitimate business of its own, ranking in the top 25 percent of the <a href="http://www.asymco.com/2014/02/10/fortune-130/" target="_blank">Fortune 500</a> (based on revenue calculations by the remarkably astute Horace Dediu).</p><p>And it was all due to Steve's brilliant negotiating. As former RIAA head Hilary Rosen recalled: "The shift came about above all because of the sheer willpower of Steve. His sheer charisma and his intensity absolutely made a difference."</p><p>If there's anything missing from Apple today, it's that quality, the ability to sell a radical idea. Senior VP of Internet Software and Services Eddie Cue is supposed to be that guy, the one who convinces uncertain TV execs that they'd be foolish not to follow Apple's lead. But with all due respect, he's no Steve Jobs. We got <a href="http://qz.com/87184/the-steve-jobs-emails-that-show-how-to-win-a-hard-nosed-negotiation/" target="_blank">a glimpse into Cue's and Jobs' negotiating skills</a> during the eBook trial, and let's just say there might not have been a lawsuit had Jobs not intervened.</p><p>A week before the iPad launch, Cue was still trying to wrap up an iBooks deal with publishing giant HarperCollins. It wasn't going well. HarperCollins and its parent company, the Murdoch-owned News Corp, were balking at Apple's proposal to set prices higher than Amazon's rock-bottom rates and secure its usual 30 percent cut. After a couple of savvy email exchanges, Steve turned a skeptical client into a partner and a set of onerous terms into a win for Apple.</p><p>This gem sums it up: After several back-and-forths, Jobs plays his trump card, outlining a set of doomsday scenarios for HarperCollins if it was to ignore the proposal, capped off with a trademark Jobs quip:</p><p>"Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t see any other alternatives. Do you?"</p><p>Two days later, HarperCollins was on board.</p><p>It's not that he was a bully (though he certainly could be). It's that Steve could see every angle of the negotiation. He knew the concerns of the other party and he found a way to alleviate them, downplaying the risks while accentuating the potential positives.&nbsp;</p><p>He convinced Hollywood to loosen its stubborn grip on physical media. He sold Pixar to Disney without relinquishing creative control. He persuaded AT&amp;T to sell the iPhone without any of the usual carrier bloatware or branding. He got Bono to do a TV commercial, for chrissakes.</p><p>Steve will always be known for the brilliant designs he left us: the Mac, the iPod, the iPad, the iPhone. But Jony Ive and Craig Federighi are more than capable of walking in those footsteps. What Apple doesn't seem to have is someone who can craft a deal as well as Jobs could.</p><p>And that could be what's holding up the next revolution.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/steve_jobs_eye_design_isnt_what_apple_misses_most#commentsBlogsAnalysisApple DesignApple TVColumnsDesignRounded RectanglesSteve JobsiPadiPhoneiPodMacTue, 18 Feb 2014 23:03:01 +0000Michael Simon19356 at http://www.maclife.comWhat the 'iPen' Patent Can Tell Us About Apple's Next Ideahttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/what_ipen_patent_can_tell_us_about_apples_next_idea
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>Through my tireless efforts to find new and interesting topics with which to entertain you each week, I happen across lots of patents. Some are absurd, many are dull and dense, but for the most part, the one thing they have in common is that they're nearly impossible to extrapolate.</p><p>There have been loads of exciting Apple patents over the years that have made headlines and got us all talking, but few have them have ever really panned out — countless concepts that have never made it out of the laboratory. In fact, I can't think of single one that actually foretold a shipping product (at least not in any real or concrete way).</p><p>That's just the way the system is structured. Any idea that can be properly explained through a series of crude diagrams and impervious rhetoric can be patented, and if the Samsung court battles have taught us anything, it's that logic is applied later. In Apple's case, most of its recognizable patents have actually surfaced after we've seen the product; for example, the patent for Touch ID didn't appear until November (several weeks after the iPhone 5s landed), despite being applied for in March. And original iPhone patents were still being awarded years after its release.</p><p>Still, they make for fascinating reading. At the very least, it's a peek into the Cupertino development process, a rare chance to see what the company is working on between revolutions. For example, in December, Apple was granted a patent for a "<a href="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&amp;Sect2=HITOFF&amp;d=PALL&amp;p=1&amp;u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&amp;r=1&amp;f=G&amp;l=50&amp;s1=8,603,574.PN.&amp;OS=PN/8,603,574&amp;RS=PN/8,603,574" target="_blank">Curved touch sensor</a>" that consists of "depositing and patterning a conductive thin film on a flexible substrate to form at least one touch sensor pattern, while the flexible substrate is in a flat state and wherein the flexible substrate is a glass substrate." (Honestly, that was the clearest description I could find.)</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/02/0211_rr_patent.png" width="620" height="431" /></p><p>It would seem that this speaks directly to Ive's work on either a curved iPhone or iWatch. The only problem with that theory is this patent application was originally filed in 2010. So, while it could very well portend the imminent release of a new device, the timing of this particular filing is completely coincidental.</p><p>But it does mean that Apple is constantly a step ahead with its innovation. If a larger, curved iPhone does come out this year, some will see it as playing catchup to the likes of Samsung and LG, but that's not how Apple operates. It studies, experiments, fails, rebuilds and perfects, only releasing something when it's right.</p><p>And patents are just a small glimpse into that process.</p><p>Another recent set of filings that have caused something of a stir centers around a supposed iPen. Last week, the always-thorough Patently Apple published an extensive report on the newest piece of the puzzle, a European filing for a "<a href="http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2014/02/a-spectacular-ipen-patent-from-apple-surfaces-in-europe.html" target="_blank">modular iPen design that would allow users to choose different modules for different tasks.</a>"</p><p>Now, we know Steve Jobs passionately hated styluses, but the technology certainly presents some potential. In the supporting documents, Apple illustrates a rather fascinating concept, with interchangeable pieces that transform the stylus from a pen to a camera, voice recorder, laser pointer, projector and, perhaps most interesting, a gesture wand. As Patently Apple writes:</p><p>"Apple notes in their patent filing that the gyro/accelerometer could also be used to detect motion in the form of stylus based air gestures. ... The in-air gestures made with the use of the stylus would be acknowledged as an input that could, for example, translate to a command of turning a page of a manual or book or to transition one presentation slide to the next. Apple also notes that in-air gestures could also act as a mouse replacement in certain instances."</p><p>I know what you're thinking. But then again, there has been a lot of talk lately about Apple entering "new categories," sometime this year, with Tim Cook reiterating his own coy claims in an interview with the <a href="http://blogs.wsj.de/blog/2014/02/07/apple-still-a-growth-company-cook-says-in-journal-interview/" target="_blank">Wall Street Journal</a>&nbsp;last week: "There will be new categories and we’re working on some great stuff. We’re not ready to talk about it. ... I think no one reasonable would say they’re not a new category."</p><p>It's that last part that intrigues me most. Cook seems to imply that whatever Apple is working on is at least in part related to an existing product--or else those unreasonable people wouldn't have much to support the argument that it doesn't create a new category. So maybe there's some truth to those rumors of a 12- to 13-inch iPad we keep reading.</p><p>An iPad any larger than the current Air will be extremely difficult to operate in the way we're used to. No matter how light it is, holding it while trying to get any actual work done will pretty much be an impossibility — so there's a good chance it will utilize some kind of new input device. And maybe an iPen really is the best way to go.</p><p>The stylus has matured quite a bit since Jobs famously panned it during the iPhone introduction, and if anything there's more of a demand for them now than before we started using Multitouch screens. A modular stylus coupled with a pro tablet would be a far greater thing than either FiftyThree's Pencil or Samsung's S Pen. When you read through Patently Apple's full report, you'll see how it could work in a very Apple-like way, literally adapting to your needs as they change.</p><p>But then again, it's just a patent.&nbsp;</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/what_ipen_patent_can_tell_us_about_apples_next_idea#commentsBlogsAnalysisappleApple DesignColumnsDesigniPenRounded RectanglesFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacWed, 12 Feb 2014 02:09:28 +0000Michael Simon19302 at http://www.maclife.comThere's One Thing Left to Redesign in iOS: the Keyboardhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/theres_one_thing_left_redesign_ios_keyboard
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="htt://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a></p><p>Keyboard design isn't something that generally gets a whole lot of attention.</p><p>Back when they were our primary input devices, keyboards were mostly viewed as cumbersome necessities, plastic nuisances that extended ungracefully from the backs of our PCs, resting lifelessly on our desktops with little character or personality. Even on laptops, where the keyboard can make or break the design, they were often an afterthought: cheap, flimsy keys crammed into fixed spaces, with little attention paid to how they felt under your fingers or where the optimal position for the mouse might be.</p><p>That is, until Apple showed them the way.</p><p>Now, you're not going to find much about keyboard innovation in the annals of its history, but it's one of the hundreds of little details that set Macs apart from PCs. The screens and the enclosures might grab all of the headlines, but Apple's relentless pursuit of perfection has permanently altered the keyboard landscape time and time again, taking risks with usability and design to make something extraordinary out of the conventional.</p><p>They're distinctive, as instantly recognizable as the machines themselves; most every keyboard you see today carries some emblem of Apple design, from Microsoft's low-profile Surface Type Cover to the recessed chiclet keys on ultrabooks.</p><p>Take the original Mac. Back in 1984, keyboards were mostly clunky, utilitarian behemoths devoid of style. Comfort and color were given nary a second thought, and even without tangled type bars to worry about, no one really experimented with alternative layouts too much. QWERTY was king, and attempts to change it — like Dr. August Dvorak's Simplified Keyboard, which re-imagined key placement for speed and accuracy — made little traction outside of hobbyist groups.&nbsp;</p><p style="text-align: right;"><img src="/files/u330237/2014/02/hero_stacked.jpg" width="620" height="446" style="text-align: right;" /><strong>Source:<a href="https://www.apple.com/30-years/1984/" target="_blank">Apple</a></strong></p><p>But at Apple, the keyboard was given a position of prominence, from its support for non-traditional layouts to its experimentation with newfangled connectors. It's doubtful you read much 30th anniversary nostalgia about the Mac's keyboard, but there were two fairly revolutionary aspects about it. For one, there weren't any arrow keys; with the proliferation of the mouse-controlled graphic user interface, Apple shortened the keyboard down to its main 59 keys (including new Option and Command keys), freeing up desktop space and encouraging users to learn to point and click.</p><p>And there were keystrokes. As John Gruber at <a href="http://daringfireball.net/2014/01/special" target="_blank">Daring Fireball</a> writes:</p><p>"So instead, the Mac’s designers looked at the keyboard itself, and considered the importance of these four commands [Undo, Cut, Copy and Paste] and how frequently they’d be used (along with how frequently they’d be used in tandem). They assigned the commands to the four letters above the Command key. ... Even these four commands’ order in the Edit menu corresponded to their shortcuts’ order on the keyboard: Undo, Cut, Copy, Paste — Z, X, C, V. Simply brilliant. Every one of these design decisions has persisted through today."</p><p>Attention to detail. You can see it in the Bondi Blue iMac's dual USB ports (so left-handed users didn't have unsightly wires draped across their desk) and the slight ergonomic curve of the Pro Keyboard. But perhaps most of all, it was on brilliant display in the original iPhone's virtual set of keys.</p><p>Seven years ago, Apple was on the bleeding edge of this new revolution. Where previous smartphones forced users to learn tiny thumb-driven QWERTY keypads, Apple combined the keyboard with the screen with the iPhone, appearing only when needed and relying on muscle memory (and a healthy serving of autocorrect) to get words right. It was a stroke of genius, and it quickly became the industry standard for smartphones.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/02/shiftlock.jpg" width="620" height="465" /></p><p>But as its mobile OS has matured, Apple hasn't paid nearly as much attention to its virtual keyboards as its physical ones. We might have been able to overlook the two years it took for the iPhone keyboard to work in landscape mode, but since iPhone OS 3, changes of any sort have been few and far between. iOS 7 streamlined things somewhat, but even with a modern look, Apple's virtual keyboard still feels hopelessly outdated. (And in the fourth beta of the upcoming 7.1 update, it actually took a step back, with a bizarre, unintelligible change to the shift key. It's since been tweaked, but it's hard to believe Apple let that one go.)</p><p>It's one of the few areas where Android's method is far superior. I barely use my Nexus 7 anymore, but when I do, the keyboard is the one feature I'd like to take with me over to my iPhone (minus the lag). It's not just that it allows installation of third-party alternatives — even the default keyboard types circles around the iOS one: the quick access to numbers, the animated response to the shift key, the multiple predictive text options.</p><p>But the third-party support truly showcases the gap between iOS and Android. My keyboard of choice on my Nexus 7 has always been Fleksy, but there are several viable options to choose from in the Play store. Minuum, Swype, SwiftKey — even Google offers its own spin — all available as global replacements that can be changed with ease.</p><p>The closest thing we have over on the iOS side is a handful of apps that tease a better way to type but stop short of actually letting us do it outside of their sandboxes worlds. There are some excellent ones — Hipjot, as well as the aforementioned <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/reviews/swiftkey_note_review">SwiftKey</a>&nbsp;(pictured below) and Fleksy — but ultimately, they're just reminders of how much better the iOS keyboard could be if Apple just expanded its capabilities.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/02/img_0509.png" width="620" height="465" /></p><p>Now, I'm not saying Apple should release an Android-like API that lets developers offer their own global keyboards; I'm not even suggesting Jony Ive should "borrow" any ideas from Android. I'm merely asking Apple goes back to its roots. We may be celebrating the Mac, but the keyboard is just as integral to the iOS experience, and it needs to start treating it as such. Enough developers have shown that the iOS keyboard can be just as smart as the interface Apple has meticulously crafted around it, but it's time to inject a little Cupertino ingenuity into it.</p><p>I hear the iPhone 6 will have a nearly 5-inch screen. It would be a shame if we were all still typing on the same 3.5-inch technology.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/theres_one_thing_left_redesign_ios_keyboard#commentsBlogsAnalysisandroidApple DesignColumnsDesignFleksyiOSios keyboardRounded RectanglesSwiftKeySwiftKey NoteFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodWed, 05 Feb 2014 01:33:58 +0000Michael Simon19241 at http://www.maclife.comiOS 7 Controller Showdown: Which is Best?http://www.maclife.com/article/features/ios_7_controller_showdown_which_best
<!--paging_filter--><p>With the release of iOS 7, Apple finally recognized the demand for physical gamepads via built-in support through its Made for iPhone/iPad/iPod (MFi) program, which means all game developers and peripheral manufacturers alike can use the same compatibility standards. Gone are the days when each individual iOS controller or joystick required its own unique programming, which made many developers shy away from physical controls and diminished the value of such peripherals. Now, any game that supports iOS 7 controllers should work with any MFi gamepad – in theory, at least. That hasn't exactly worked out thus far, with at least one game only compatible with a certain early controller, and a few titles that work better on some gamepads than others.<br /><br /><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/mfiroundup.jpg" width="620" height="369" /></p><p>It took a few months, but the first supported controllers began launching before the end of the year, and three have trickled out to date: MOGA's Ace Power for iPhone/iPod touch, the Logitech PowerShell for iPhone/iPod touch, and the SteelSeries Stratus for any iOS device. Each is distinctly designed and offers its own respective array of input options and other features, though all three arrive at daunting price points. Is it worth being an early adopter, or should you wait for the next round of options?<br /><br />We've got full reviews of all three between our current and upcoming print and digital issues, but if you're thinking about investing in an iOS 7 game controller now, here's a concise look at the strengths and weaknesses of each, complete with our review scores from the full appraisals.</p><h3>MOGA Ace Power ($99.95)</h3><p>MOGA made a name for itself in the Android market with appealing phone controllers, but the Ace Power marks its first foray into the iOS peripheral world. When closed, the Ace Power looks much like a compact console gamepad – complete with a pair of analog sticks — albeit with an opening in the center. Pull on both ends, however, and it stretches out wide enough to snugly hold an iPhone or iPod touch, which connects via the Lightning port. That also allows the controller to charge your iOS device via its built-in 1800mAh battery pack.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/moga.png" width="620" height="280" /></p><p>Despite its array of input options and the portability-friendly contracting design, MOGA's debut iOS controller suffers from a very cheap-feeling build — and among the initially small number of games compatible with the Ace Power, some aren't well optimized for the device. However, the biggest issue we encountered came with the unresponsive front buttons, which required a very firm press to register. We could lightly tap a button numerous times over and see no in-game result, which means missed inputs are sadly common. For $100, we expect a whole lot more.<br /><br /><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/screen_shot_2014-01-29_at_5.41.35_pm.png" alt="Score: 2.5 (Okay)" width="620" height="99" /></p><h3>Logitech PowerShell ($99.99)</h3><p>Logitech's PowerShell is similar in philosophy to MOGA's controller, with a design built to encase your iPhone or iPod touch and a 1500mAh battery built in to charge the iOS device during use. It's sturdier than the Power Ace and feels a bit more premium in build, but it's functionally a much simpler option, with only a d-pad, four face buttons, and two shoulder buttons. Luckily, the buttons are very responsive and work perfectly.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/logitech.jpg" width="620" height="310" /></p><p>The same can't be said for the d-pad, which makes the PowerShell effectively useless for many types of games. Its unresponsive design means that subtle, nuanced inputs aren't possible, which makes racing games, 3D action games, and other types of games less playable (and much less enjoyable) compared to using touch and/or tilt controls. Some games – mostly 2D side-scrolling ones – don't suffer as much, but that hardly justifies a purchase. It's been sold for as low as $70 already, but even cutting its MSRP in half wouldn't make up for its significant deficiencies as a controller.<br /><br /><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/screen_shot_2014-01-29_at_5.41.57_pm.png" alt="Score: 2.0 (Weak)" width="620" height="102" /></p><h3>SteelSeries Stratus ($79.99)</h3><p>The third time's a charm – relatively speaking – when it comes to iOS 7 gamepads, as the most recent release is the best of the bunch. SteelSeries has a long history of quality peripherals for various platforms, and the Stratus is the first iOS controller that actually makes a physical gamepad seem worthwhile on the platform. Unlike the other two options, it's a wireless Bluetooth pad, thus making it most ideal for iPad use (though it'll work with all iOS 7 devices). With dual analog sticks, a directional pad, four face buttons, and four shoulder buttons up top, it offers the full array of input options that most advanced games demand.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/steelseries_copy.png" width="620" height="389" /><br /><br />It's not a perfect option, however. While better built than the MOGA, it still has a non-durable, cheap plastic feel to it, which doesn't match well with the price point. And with dimensions not far removed from an older iPhone (albeit a bit thicker), it's remarkably small – and to a fault. The cramped design puts the L2/R2 buttons inset near the center, making them harder to reach and thus impacting the likes of racing and shooting games. And despite the price dropping $20 for the launch, it's still too expensive; sturdier and better-designed controllers for other platforms cost much less than this, but we don't have those kinds of options as of now.<br /><br /><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/screen_shot_2014-01-29_at_5.42.35_pm.png" alt="Score: 3.5 (Good)" width="620" height="100" /></p><h3>The bottom line</h3><p>Among the three early iOS gamepads, the only one we can really recommend is the SteelSeries Stratus – primarily because it's the only one that fully works as a game controller. Granted, that's a somewhat qualified recommendation, as the steep price and cramped design are notable drawbacks. But does it make certain games play much better, especially on the iPad? Absolutely. So if you need an iOS 7 controller right now, the Stratus is the one to get. While the battery functionality on the MOGA and Logitech peripherals is a nice touch, both suffer as game controllers, and neither is worth seeking out at or near full price.<br /><br />It's early days still for iOS 7 controllers, and these are merely the respective first stabs by a trio of manufacturers. For the average consumer, we'd advise a wait-and-see approach. We will no doubt see additional – and hopefully better – options in the months to come, and with luck, we'll also see a more palatable range of price points to appeal to all levels of iOS gamers. And when that happens, there will also be many more compatible games, making a gamepad purchase all the more worthwhile. But if you're set on getting an iOS 7 controller now, heed our advice and choose wisely.</p><p><em>(Editor's Note: The original version of this article listed the Logitech PowerShell's price at $69.95, which is actually a limited-time offer. We've corrected the piece to list the standard MSRP for the peripheral.)</em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/features/ios_7_controller_showdown_which_best#commentsReviewsAnalysiscontrollercontrollersHardwareInput DevicesiOS 7iOS 7 controllerios gamesiPhone HardwareiPodLogitechLogitech PowershellMFiMFi controllerMOGAMOGA Ace PowerSteelseriesSteelseries StratusFeaturesInterfaceiPadiPhoneiPodGamesThu, 30 Jan 2014 01:47:18 +0000Andrew Hayward19187 at http://www.maclife.comFinding the Cure for Writer's Block in a Web Apphttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/finding_cure_writers_block_web_app
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>Lord knows how much I've spent on apps for writing.</p><p>It wasn't so bad when I only had my Mac to worry about. Every few months, something new would come along promising tighter compatibility and a better overall experience, and I would eagerly fork over a few bucks to check it out. I bounced from Word to WordPerfect to Nisus in search of the perfect writing experience; something powerful, clean and versatile that would stay out of my way while I worked.&nbsp;</p><p>But even before we entered the post-PC era, sharing was always an issue. It wasn't so much a formatting or extension problem — for all the Mac-vs-PC handwringing in the '90s and '00s, there were more than enough universal file formats for writers — it was a location obstacle. Articles on my desktop were tricky to access on my laptop without a fancy network hook-up, and traveling required emailing or burning to make sure I had the latest version at my disposal. And if I managed to work on something away from my main Mac, keeping things in sync required a choice between scary overwriting, cutting and pasting, or simply keeping dozens of versions around until the project was finished, none of which was elegant or effortless.</p><p>These days, things are a whole lot better. Whether you're using iCloud, Dropbox, Simperium or some other syncing agent, it's a whole new world for writers. With the flick of a switch, anything I type is silently uploaded and speedily updated across all associated apps.&nbsp;</p><p>But that doesn't mean my search is over. My current favorite writing tool is the Daedalus Touch-Ulysses III combo, but I've used dozens over the years — Pages, Writer, Write, Byword ... you get the idea. There are still roadblocks to perfection. For one, we need to download and often pay for multiple versions of the same app on different platforms; for another, most developers focus their efforts on either Apple or Android, leaving a familiar dilemma if you happen to own a mix of Apple and Google devices. And if you want to access previous versions of your work, you'd better be prepared to take a trip with Time Machine.</p><p>It wasn't supposed to be this way. Not too long ago, web apps were the saviors of the new world — rich, universal programs that needed little more than a browser to deliver their power. Steve Jobs believed in them so wholly he nearly bet the entire future of the iPhone on them, telling developers during its launch: "You’ve got everything you need if you know how to write apps using the most modern web standards to write amazing apps for the iPhone today."</p><p>And at least one developer still believes that's true.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/0128_rr_1.png" width="620" height="465" /></p><p>Nathan Kontny is no stranger to technology. A former software engineer for President Obama's re-election campaign, he has a pair of Y Combinator start-ups under his belt (Inkling and Cityposh) and operates his own Svbtle blog, ninjasandrobots.com, where he shares intimate stories about personal and professional triumphs and pitfalls. But as a bit of a perfectionist, he wasn't content with the crop of collaborative writing apps that the App Store had to offer. So he made his own.</p><p>"<a href="http://draftin.com" target="_blank">Draft</a> started as just a simple way to mark major versions of my work that I could easily go through to find that old stuff," Kontny said. "The tools for writing weren't actually helping me get any better at writing. I'd want to write something, but then make major revisions to the document, but still keep all the old stuff so I could revisit that old work."</p><p>Draft isn't just the best web app I've ever used, it's quickly becoming one of my go-to writing apps. Following the trend of minimal interfaces, the workspace is clean and free of distractions, but Kontny still puts his own unique stamp on things. The main screen is a playful mix of colors that give it a look unlike one you'd find on any platform — and that's pretty much the point.</p><p>"When I design things, I prefer to give myself as few choices as I can possibly have," Kontny said. "Stick with what you need. Then, stick with what you know. ... I'm just trying to make good stuff."</p><p>When you use Draft, Kontny's passion is evident. From the surprisingly extensive customization options to the painless collaboration tools, there are times when I forget that I'm working within a browser. My documents and settings easily migrate to any device I'm working on, and the interface is consistent across every screen, no matter how small. There are some issues, of course — chief among them is the lack of inertia scrolling while editing — but Draft feels like the future of apps: not just cross-platform, but no-platform.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/0128_rr_2.png" width="620" /></p><p>"I love building small things and quickly iterating on them. If Draft were primarily an iOS or desktop app, the cycle of improving the product would slow down considerably," Kontny said. "Technology trends are pendulums ... and these days the pendulum has swung far towards businesses and apps focusing on mobile devices. So many developers are building their businesses on first coming out with a single app for the iPhone. That's great, but the market for iPhone apps just gets more and more crowded because of all the attention. And that leaves a lot of opportunity to revisit building great web apps again."</p><p>So, if that means Draft can't take advantage of the latest and greatest technologies, so be it. Kontny is perfectly happy to move a little slower than the pack, even if Draft never catches up to the Writer Pros and Editorals of the world.</p><p>"One memory that's always stuck with me is how old my dad's tools were. He kept using that same old hammer or chisel covered in spackle and paint," he said. "He sticks with what he knows and already is good at.</p><p>"I treat my technology stack like that. I keep going with what I know rather than getting frustrated my saw isn't as fast as the new one I could buy."</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/finding_cure_writers_block_web_app#commentsBlogsAnalysisApple DesignAppsColumnsDesignDraftRounded RectanglesWeb Appswritingwriting appsFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacWed, 29 Jan 2014 01:38:42 +0000Michael Simon19174 at http://www.maclife.comThe Innovation Race is Killing Innovationhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/innovation_race_killing_innovation
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines innovation as the act or process of introducing new ideas, devices or methods. But when we're talking about technology, that definition doesn't quite tell the whole story. It's not just the unveiling of some new or better design — it's making as big a splash as possible before anyone else can even get in the pool.</p><p>It was once a relatively slow process. Every few years, an exciting new product would come along that indelibly altered the landscape: color televisions, VCRs, Walkmen, iPods. It was given room to grow and evolve until something inevitably better was born out of its influence.&nbsp;</p><p>It's a cycle, a process that can't be forced. Innovation begets innovation, and there's no secret shortcut that'll produce the next big thing. Yet these days, it seems everyone wants a magical innovation button. And they want it now.</p><p>1998. 2001. 2007. 2010. Any Apple fan has those years etched in their mind. The iMac. The iPod. The iPhone. The iPad. It was an incredible string of success that raised unrealistic expectations of a revolving door of innovation, as if Steve Jobs could just pluck brilliant designs out of thin air. What no one seems to pay much attention to is the iterative progression between each breakthrough — iTunes, FireWire, nanos and shuffles, the App Store — engineering and development leaps that made those first prototypes possible.</p><p style="text-align: center;"><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/steve-jobs.jpg" width="620" height="419" /><strong>Things like the iPod Shuffle didn't "just happen," after all.</strong></p><p>But no one wants to put in the work anymore. No one sees the six years between the iPod and iPhone. They just want the end result.&nbsp;</p><p>Of course, Samsung's the easiest target of this criticism. The biggest proponent of the let's-see-what-sticks philosophy, it seems a new product is hastily released every few days looking to fill another void; last week it was the Galaxy Tab 3 Lite tablet, an iPad mini-sized slate with the same underwhelming specs as the one that was released some six months ago, but in a slightly more portable package. There's no real effort to make it better — just to get it out to whatever audience is demanding it, no matter how small.</p><p>And that, in a nutshell, is the problem. There may be a few decent products in Samsung's arsenal, but even the flagship Galaxy S4 doesn't have the polished feel of a fourth-generation product. With Apple, you can see major strides between the iPhone 3G and the iPhone 5, but that gap isn't nearly as evident with older Galaxies.</p><p>It's more than a mere lack of attention to detail — it's a willingness to completely ignore it in order to compete in a misguided innovation race, a belief that rushing a product to market to grab a few sales and a bunch of headlines is somehow more important than building something great.</p><p>Case in point: the Galaxy Gear. It's not just that it's a flop — epic failures are part of the design process, particularly with fledgling product categories. What's troubling is just how compromised it feels, as if there were a thousand yeses for every no. Here's what <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/1/4779568/samsung-galaxy-gear-review" target="_blank">The Verge</a> had to say in <a href="http://www.theverge.com/2013/10/1/4779568/samsung-galaxy-gear-review" target="_blank">its review</a>:</p><p>"Its design tries to have something for everyone — a chunky steel clasp and exposed screws for fans of oversized men’s watches, yet also Rose Gold and Oatmeal Beige colors for a feminine audience — and ends up pleasing no one in particular. It’s too bulky to ever be considered elegant, but too polished to be a proper macho watch. The glass covering the front melts seamlessly into the metal frame around it, which in turn gives way to a plastic back and an adjustable strap whose flexibility is limited somewhat by the integrated camera."</p><p>My own experiences with it are similar. It's as if no one at Samsung gave any thought to what would make the Gear an innovative 21st century device that forever changes the way we think of watches. Instead, Samsung cobbled together an overpriced, unimpressive gadget with limited functionality and even less appeal. But it got there first, and that's all that mattered.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/galaxy-gear-official-1.jpg" width="620" /></p><p>The company all but admitted it at CES: "When we release our S5 device," said Lee Young Hee, executive vice president of Samsung's mobile unit, "you can also expect a Gear successor with more advanced functions, and the bulky design will also be improved." Could you ever imagine Tim Cook or Phil Schiller saying that about an Apple product?</p><p>They wouldn't, because Apple would never release a product as unfinished as the Galaxy Gear. While the rest of the industry fights for position and attention, Apple is playing the same game it always has: Jony Ive would rather wait a year or two — or just scrap the project altogether — than release something that wasn't as innovative as it could be.</p><p>We haven't seen a truly new product from Apple in nearly four years, and for some, that means the company is somehow losing its touch. But they're ignoring the big picture and all failing to see how all those little leaps add up.</p><p>Just last week, Jobs biographer Walter Isaacson claimed on <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/101337885" target="_blank">CNBC's Squawk Box</a> that Google had supplanted Apple as the industry's top innovator, citing its acquisition of Nest as the most recent proof: "Tony Fadell was part of the team that created the iPod, he was very deep into the Apple culture — that's when Apple was so innovative. You didn't expect them to come out with a music player, and because of Tony Fadell and a few others, they did. Now, Tony Fadell is going to Google."</p><p>Perhaps he's right, and Fadell will spur Google to build the next big thing, but so far there's nothing any more innovative coming out of Mountain View than there is from Cupertino. Google has plenty of fascinating ideas and designs — Glass, Nexus Q, smart contact lenses, self-driving cars — but none have made an impact, and most aren't even close to public release.&nbsp;</p><p>It's the illusion of innovation, a race to nowhere, and it's hurting real innovators like Apple and Nest. Fadell's startup was one of the most innovative in years, transforming mundane household products into chic, desirable works of art. Now it's under Google's sizable umbrella, a $3 billion bet based in large part on a hope that there's something amazingly great in the pipeline that Google can claim as its very own.</p><p>I just hope they let Fadell take his time with it.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; background-color: transparent; color: #0099cc; text-decoration: none;" href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/innovation_race_killing_innovation#commentsBlogsAnalysisApple DesignColumnsDesignGalaxy GearGalaxy Tab 3 LiteRounded RectanglesSamsungiPadiPhoneiPodMacWed, 22 Jan 2014 03:19:52 +0000Michael Simon19115 at http://www.maclife.comWithout Apple, the Smartwatch Market is Just Plain Dumbhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/without_apple_smartwatch_market_just_plain_dumb
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>You know, there's a reason why the iPhone is classified as a smartphone.</p><p>It's not because it has a touch screen or because it has more features than a flip phone. It has nothing to do with its design or LTE networking or sensors, nor is it because of its 64-bit chip. Quite frankly, it's not because of anything that it does, but rather what it can do — boundless capabilities made possible by hundreds of thousands of native apps, tiny programs running on a dedicated, independent operating system. They don't need any assistance; install them and they just work.</p><p>Back in 2007, some people questioned whether the iPhone was truly a smartphone since it lacked this basic ability, but today the term is applied much more loosely. Anything that can be controlled by an iPhone is suddenly a smart this or smart that, and we seem to have forgotten what actually makes these gadgets intelligent.</p><p>They're little computers with, you guessed it, brains. Just because you can control your slow cooker from your desk at work via an iPhone app doesn't make it smart. CES was a wellspring for these sort of gadgets, all categorized under the same term because because they have connected digital screens or offer some kind of technological leap. But nothing about them is smart.</p><p>And that includes all those watches everyone keeps talking about.</p><p>Sure, they have native apps, but the platform running them is hardly independent. You don't need to be a genius to see it — I mean, the entire creepy Galaxy Gear ad is predicated on the notion that the new expensive gadget you wear on your wrist is little more than an accessory for your phone, offering as much brainpower as a Bluetooth keyboard or a speaker dock.</p><p><iframe src="//www.youtube.com/embed/1cn5pTeR0Ws" width="620" height="315" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><p>Go back precisely seven years and eight days, and you'll see a very different landscape of smartphones. Before Steve Jobs unveiled the iPhone, smartphone makers were flailing to find a formula for success. They were clunky, with physical keyboards and small screens, ugly browsers, and few real killer features. The iPhone showed them what smart was, and the industry was forever transformed.</p><p>Or go back four years to CES 2010. Based on swirling rumors of an Apple iSlate, HP, Lenovo, Sony, Archos, Nvidia and Dell all talked up overpriced tablets that tried to deliver a PC environment in a touch-friendly shell. The iPad sent them all back to the drawing board.</p><p>You'd think they would have learned their lesson by now.&nbsp;</p><p>Mind you, I'm still a little skeptical that Apple is actually going to release something to compete in this space, but if it does, you can be assured that it'll make all of the smartwatches announced last week look downright silly.</p><p>I know this is a design column, but let's leave that alone for a moment. I could write 1,000 words alone on how clunky and unattractive they are; none of them really look good — though the hulking Pebble Steel is certainly a step up from last year's model — and the only wearables that are remotely fashionable are glorified pedometers. But good looks are a given — what Apple really needs to bring to the table is a reason to label it smart.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/140106c.steel-trio.png" width="620" /></p><p>First and foremost, it needs to work without being tethered to an iPhone. Every single smartwatch that's been released needs some kind of Bluetooth connection to be useful. Of course, a tight sync between it and your iPhone is paramount to its success, but it needs to do more than display the time when your phone isn't nearby. That means building in some kind of cellular connection so you can receive email, texts and, of course, notifications without being tethered.</p><p>And then there's the interface. Think back to the sixth generation of the iPod nano for a moment. Forget that it still looks better than anything on the market, it also has a better UI than most of the so-called smartwatches I've used. If that's what Apple could design back in 2010, just imagine what they can do with another three years of experience. The nano knew what it was and what it wasn't; gone were Notes, Contacts, Calendars and Games, all replaced with a streamlined navigation for music, a pedometer and a variety of watch faces. Even before wearables were trendy, Apple had a vision for how one should work.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2014/01/redesign_leather_black_frontface_960x540_120521.original.png" width="620" /></p><p>Above all, it's about simplicity, the same simplicity that made the iPhone and the iPad seem equally obvious and impossible. And that's what makes them so damn smart.</p><p>Whether the iPhone was an according-to-Hoyle smartphone in 2007 doesn't matter; it changed the definition and our expectations of it. Now we define smartphones as before iPhone and after iPhone. And it'll be the same with the iWatch.&nbsp;</p><p>If we ever actually get to wear one.</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/without_apple_smartwatch_market_just_plain_dumb#commentsAnalysisApple DesignApple iWatchApple smart watchColumnsDesigniWatchpebblePebble SteelRounded RectanglessmartwatchsmartwatchesWed, 15 Jan 2014 00:38:21 +0000Michael Simon19058 at http://www.maclife.comThe 2013 Rounded Rectangles iOS Design Awardshttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/2013_rounded_rectangles_ios_design_awards
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a></p><p>It's been quite a year for iOS. Jony Ive's redesign shook things up, but developers once again stole the show, taking the Helvetica Neue Light ball and running with it. From slick, minimal buttons to beautiful fonts and menus, 2013 was the year iOS apps fully matured and finally left its iPhone OS roots behind. So without further ado, here are my favorite designs of the past 12 months:</p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/2013_rounded_rectangles_ios_design_awards#commentsGalleryAnalysisApple DesignColumnsDesignRounded RectanglesFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacTue, 07 Jan 2014 23:43:01 +0000Michael Simon19001 at http://www.maclife.comYou Won't Believe Google's Latest Hypocrisyhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/you_wont_believe_googles_latest_hypocrisy
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Law_Apple" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u315479/law-and-apple_200x150.jpg" alt="Law &amp; Apple" width="200" height="150" class="graphic-right" /></a></p><p>Google formed with an internal motto of "Don't Be Evil" in response to the perceived business practices of Microsoft, and then proceeded over the years to manipulate customer data (<a href="http://gizmodo.com/5878987/its-official-google-is-evil-now" target="_blank">see what Google does when you search</a>) and force software on users&nbsp;(<a href="http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/01/google-doubles-plus-membership-with-brute-force-signup-process/" target="_blank">see how you are already signed up for&nbsp;Google+</a>) much like Redmond. Now the Mountain View company is taking hypocrisy to a new level with their latest lawsuit against the Apple- and Microsoft-led Rockstar Consortium. Ah, the irony!</p><h3>Google vs. Rockstar</h3><p>Last week <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/193622965/13-12-23-Google-N-D-Cal-DJ-Action-Against-Rockstar-Consortium" target="_blank">Google filed a lawsuit</a> in the Northern District of California against Rockstar and its subsidiary, MobileStar Technologies. The case was brought in response to a series of lawsuits <a href="http://www.fosspatents.com/2013/11/failed-44-billion-bid-for-nortel.html" target="_blank">Rockstar filed in October 2013</a>&nbsp;in the Eastern District of Texas against Google and seven of its Android hardware partners: Samsung, Huawei, ZTE, LG, HTC, Pantech, and ASUSTeK.</p><p>The Rockstar lawsuit against Google focused on search engine use, and also included actions against the Android manufacturer for a variety of hardware and software issues. Google's response, however, is an attempt to block and disrupt that lawsuit, based on lots of fancy talk about what a rotten patent troll Rockstar is.</p><p>Many bloggers around the internet have taken the bait and attempted to turn this story into a "Google against Apple's Patent Troll" hero's journey, but the facts suggest something ironically different.</p><p style="text-align: center;"><img src="/files/u315479/patent-troll.png" alt="Patent Troll" width="620" height="300" /></p><p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Patent troll? You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.</strong></p><p>Rockstar was formed by Apple, BlackBerry, EMC, Ericsson, Microsoft, and Sony <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/news/its_done_deal_courts_ok_nortel_patent_sale_apple_group" target="_blank">to purchase the patents of dying tech star Nortel in July of 2011</a>&nbsp;for $4.5 billion. Google is attempting to spin this event as an example of patent trolling, while ignoring the fact that it was the company that overinflated the price for these patents in the first place.</p><p>Google went hard after the Nortel patents, opening with a $900 million bid that sounded alarm bells across the industry. It was clear what Google wanted to do with these patents: use them to force Apple to stop suing Android manufactures. Google bid as high as $4.4 billion for the patents. No other single company wanted to pay as much as Google to gain these patents, but by joining together and forming Rockstar, they were able to cobble together a winning bid of $4.5 billion.</p><p>But Google was not finished there; the Mountain View company went on to <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/news/google_gets_hardware_game_motorola_acquisition" target="_blank">buy the remains of Motorola for $12.5 billion</a>&nbsp;and has tried unsuccessfully to use those patents to sue Apple and other members of Rockstar. To date, the Motorola purchase <a href="http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/googles_125_billion_plan_foil_apple_fails_again" target="_blank">has been a total bust</a> for Google in the courtroom.</p><p>And that isn't even the extent of Google's use/misuse of the patent system to protect itself. As Florian Mueller points outs in an op/ed piece for <a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/technology/191493-sue-when-youre-winning" target="_blank">The Hill</a> from this past November, Google "bought roughly 2,000 patents from IBM, and smaller quantities from failed startups and entities it now denounces as 'trolls', such as Mosaid, against which it later brought an antitrust complaint in the European Union. Another 'troll', Intellectual Ventures, had received one of its first investments ever from Google."</p><p>Google has been aggressive in seeking out patents to use as leverage against other companies since the release of Android, which Mueller correctly states was released "in 2007, using — but not licensing — Apple's multi-touch interface concepts, Microsoft's operating system technologies, Oracle's Java programming language, and probably also some other players' inventions." The fact is, using other company's patents without paying for them, and then manipulating the patent system to cover its tracks, is simply what Google <em>does</em>.</p><p>Clearly, the patent system in the U.S. is broken, and clearly all of the major companies in the tech industry attempt to leverage it agains their competitors. But at this point, for Google to play the part of the victim against a big bad Apple patent troll is almost as absurd as the bloggers that are regurgitating the Mountain View propaganda.</p><p><em>Connect with this writer, Adrian Hoppel, through his website:<a href="http://adrianhoppel.com" target="_blank"> adrianhoppel.com</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/you_wont_believe_googles_latest_hypocrisy#commentsNewsBlogsAnalysisApple vs. GoogleColumnsGoogleLaw & AppleLawsuitlegal dramaOpinionPatentpatent trollsFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacThu, 02 Jan 2014 23:19:11 +0000Adrian Hoppel18964 at http://www.maclife.comApple's Top 8 Courtroom Adventures for 2013http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/apples_top_8_courtroom_adventures_2013
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/law_apple"><img src="/files/u315479/law-and-apple_200x150.jpg" alt="Law &amp; Apple" width="200" height="150" class="graphic-right" /></a>This past year has been full of courtroom drama for Apple, and we've done our best to keep you up to speed <a href="http://www.maclife.com/search/Law%20%2526%20Apple" target="_blank">each week in our Law &amp; Apple column</a>. From the hot mess of a trial against the Justice Department regarding eBook conspiracies, to the ongoing Patent Wars with Samsung, to the zany lawsuits brought by people trying to get rich quick, there has been no shortage of material.</p><p>When you look back on the year, however, some weeks stand out more than others. We definitely have our favorites, but we're not the ones who count; you are. So we snuck into the secret location where our web servers are hidden, took some selfies, and then&nbsp;we dug into the files to see which Law &amp; Apple columns you like the best. In any event, here they are, in countdown form...</p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/apples_top_8_courtroom_adventures_2013#commentsGalleryBlogsAnalysisappleColumnscourtroom dramaiOS 7Jony IveLaw & Applelegal battlesSamsungSteve JobsTim CookFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacWed, 25 Dec 2013 20:00:00 +0000Adrian Hoppel18929 at http://www.maclife.comRounded Rectangles' 8 Best Design Innovations of 2013http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/rounded_rectangles_8_best_design_innovations_2013
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles" target="_blank"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>It's easy to write off 2013 as a year without any real design innovations. The first great smartwatch is going to have to wait till next year — sorry, Samsung and Pebble — and we didn't get a new Apple product that wasn't a riff on a previous one. And Google didn't make any headway with Glass.</p><p>But it wasn't a lost year by any stretch. We might not look back on 2013 as the watershed year that 2007 was, but even without a big bang, there were a number of advancements that made us look, touch and think just a little different:</p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/rounded_rectangles_8_best_design_innovations_2013#commentsGalleryBlogsAnalysisApple DesignBestbest of 2013best-ofChromecastColumnsDesignG FlexiOS 7iPad AirLeap MotionMac ProNest ProtectRounded RectanglesTouch IDFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodMacTue, 24 Dec 2013 17:00:00 +0000Michael Simon18944 at http://www.maclife.comReports of Newsstand's Death Have Been Greatly Exaggeratedhttp://www.maclife.com/article/columns/reports_newsstands_death_have_been_greatly_exaggerated
<!--paging_filter--><p><a href="http://www.maclife.com/tags/Rounded_Rectangles"><img src="/files/u330237/2012/11/roundedrectangles_200.jpg" width="200" height="79" class="graphic-right" /></a>Skeuomorphism comes in many forms. There is the kind we all hate, cheap digital replicas that mostly detract from the experience, muddling otherwise clean interfaces with unnecessary textures and ornaments. Other forms pay homepage to their real-world counterparts, painstakingly recreating buttons and knobs to bring a level of familiarity that helps ease the transition between the two worlds.</p><p>And then there are those implementations that are much more subtle. They might not be visually offensive like the stitched leather in Find My Friends or the green felt in GameCenter, but they hinder development all the same. By keeping a firm footing in the reality they were emulating they cheapen the experience, missing opportunities for innovation by relying too much on elements that weren't made for touch screens.</p><p>The digital publishing world is probably the biggest victim of this. You can see it in the myriad ways to read The New York Times; there might not be any specific skeuomorphs to point to, but for the most part they all try way too hard to imitate their printed doppelgängers. And it's not just the Times — the App Store is filled with newspapers and magazines that offer little more than a downloadable version hastily formatted for a screen, replicas with the same static layouts and page-by-page reading.</p><p>Back in 2011, The Daily did its best to break that mold. With a belief that people would pay for original content if it was presented properly, The Daily attempted to do what no other publication had done before: build a bona fide newspaper for the touch-screen generation. It had its share of flaws, but the biggest problem was an over-reliance on an outdated model; while it offered plenty of features that were impossible with print, many of its pages felt like they were designed for ink rather than pixels.</p><p>When Newsstand came along it only reinforced these old habits. With an uninspired skeuomorphic design that placed digital publications on virtual wood-grained shelves, Apple provided readers with a visual expectation of the print experience; even the icons were reminiscent of their real-world counterparts, with varying sizes that represented miniaturized versions of what you would find at an actual newsstand.</p><p>There wasn't a real breakthrough until <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-magazine./id557744510?mt=8" target="_blank">The Magazine</a>. It completely eschewed everything we expected from a periodical — the first few issues didn't even have photos — building a content-first platform with a plain, simple design that focused on reading rather than layout. Articles were presented as single scrollable sheets without the need to "flip" pages, all navigated using a table of contents that was accessible anywhere. It truly felt like a new kind of publication, something that re-imagined casual reading on a tablet. (Case in point: Its hardbound Kickstarter campaign presents the same stories in traditional print layouts, giving them distinct personalities and creating a clear divide between the two formats.)</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2013/12/themagazine.png" width="620" /></p><p>It's been a slow maturation process, one that practically mirrors the decline of the printing press. But unlike its ink-and-paper brethren, the future of digital publishing is definitely looking up. The Magazine has changed the way we look at publishing, and a trio of platforms have embraced its concept of letting the content breathe while exploring unique ways to engage the reader.</p><p>"When we set out to make TypeEngine, we knew that we wanted the platform to be capable of generating beautiful, easy-to-read apps — one that reflected all of the design sensibilities of the publisher'" said Jamie Smyth, CEO of The Smyth Group. "But we refused to kowtow to the old 'print replica' ridiculous albatross the circulation agencies have strapped to the big magazine publishers. We wanted to provide a comprehensible, beautiful reading experience for readers and a flexible, themeable, collaborative platform for publishers."</p><p>Smyth readily admits that The Magazine was "absolutely an inspiration" for <a href="http://typeengine.net/" target="_blank">TypeEngine</a>, and its similarly stripped-down interface has already attracted a number of clients looking to present a clean, instantaneous reading experience. There's an obvious uniformity across each of its publication partners, but a diverse use of fonts, colors and graphics gives each app its own identity--and prevents them all from looking like Magazine rip-offs.</p><p>The trend may be towards these types of text-centric designs, but as long as we can swipe and pinch our screens, there will always be a place for dynamic layouts. <a href="http://prss.com/" target="_blank">Prss</a> seems to have found a middle ground between print and digital. While its publications might not look anything like the ones produced by TypeEngine, their philosophies are quite similar; its first release, <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/shift-by-tnw/id710446182?mt=8" target="_blank">Shift</a> by The Next Web, is designed very much like a traditional magazine — with side-scrolling pages and bold layouts — although the experience of reading it is anything but.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2013/12/shift.png" width="620" /></p><p>"The reader app wasn't intended to behave exactly the same as a print publication," said Prss co-founder Michel Elings. "The focus was really to have a great and joyful reader experience. One that didn't involve any technical knowledge, with that I mean waiting for downloads, menus that appear, blocks, crappy UI ... We wanted to make it as easy as possible to read and get inspired."</p><p>There's a speed and intuition built into Prss that belies its design. Shift feels almost like a pre-Magazine publication, with abundant graphics and touchable type that get in the way, but despite an overabundance of links and images, Shift isn't clunky. Even with a heavy use of media, navigation and reading is as smooth as a TypeEngine app.</p><p>If Prss and TypeEngine are on opposite ends of the digital publishing spectrum, <a href="http://createglide.com/" target="_blank">Glide</a> has positioned itself midway between them. There's a definite lightweight feel to its interface, but a liberal use of graphics and animation give it a true tablet feel that distances it from anything printed on glossy paper.</p><p>"I think that the the current and still pervasive method of swiping through page after page of strictly formatted text, often in two rigid columns, is a terrible experience and extremely taxing for the user," said Chris Harris, CEO of Glide Creations. "We have to throw away our previous conceptions because they were developed to mimic physical media. Touch screen devices are capable of blending any media into one container. ... We simply need to choose which media types are appropriate for telling which parts of our story."</p><p>Just read the latest edition of <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/the-loop-magazine/id641340497?mt=8" target="_blank">The Loop</a> and you'll instantly see what he means. Jim Dalrymple's magazine — which incidentally began its life with TypeEngine before rebooting with issue 13 — is a brilliant mix of motion, graphics, transitions and blurs that pull you into the story without diverting your focus. It reads like a magazine but feels like something completely new, a true digital periodical that takes The Magazine's minimalism to a new level.</p><p><img src="/files/u330237/2013/12/loop2.png" width="620" height="465" /></p><p>And you'll find all of these publications, whether created using TypeEngine, Prss or Glide, in Newsstand. There may come a day when our home screens are filled with standalone publications, but for now, Apple's method "still represents tremendous opportunity for delivering paid periodical content," Smyth said. Elings agreed, calling Newsstand "an amazing system with amazing potential."</p><p>Newspapers and magazines have always been about content, but somewhere along the way it got lost in a sea of flashy graphics and one-your-face advertisements. But the new generations of tablet publications are working hard to strip away the clutter and open up a whole new world of reading on our iPhones and iPads, even if we have to use Newsstand to get to it.</p><p>"The boundaries where content resides are disappearing," Harris said. "We merely need to decide the most appropriate way to deliver our stories."</p><p><em>Find Michael Simon on Twitter or App.net&nbsp;<a href="http://twitter.com/morlium" target="_blank">@morlium</a></em></p>http://www.maclife.com/article/columns/reports_newsstands_death_have_been_greatly_exaggerated#commentsBlogsAnalysisApple DesignColumnsDesignGlidemagazinemagazinesnewsstandPrssRounded RectanglesShiftThe LoopTypeEngineFeaturesiPadiPhoneiPodTue, 17 Dec 2013 23:06:31 +0000Michael Simon18894 at http://www.maclife.com